Is the West ‘unfairly targeting’ Muslims?

Severed heads on the ground. Nothing has changed in 1400 years… [click to view full size] (source)

It’s the equivalent of saying, are the laws against breaking and entering ‘unfairly targeting’ burglars?

Or are the laws against assault ‘unfairly targeting’ violent thugs?

Thousands of laws are passed each year which limit the freedoms of the public to undertake certain acts. An example, taken at random, is the Road Transport Amendment (Mandatory Alcohol Interlock Program) Act 2014 (NSW), which creates a number of new offences relating to alcohol interlocks on vehicles. At least 99.9995% of the population will never have to worry about these new offences. Are these laws ‘unfairly targeting’ the 0.0005% that will be affected by the new laws?

In all these cases, the answer is ‘no’.

Fourteen hundred years of bloody history has shown us that Islam is incapable of peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims. Islam requires its adherents to conquer, convert or kill the unbelievers – the infidels, the filthy kafir.

Since the 7th century, Islam has been, and today remains, in a constant battle to expand and conquer territories throughout the world. For periods it has been in retreat, due to the refusal of others to submit, but now it is clearly in a phase of advance, as political correctness and multiculturalism blindfold and handcuff our leaders to the threat posed by this intolerant ideology.

Sharia law is incompatible with Western concepts of freedom and democracy. Those characteristics of our society, such as free speech, equality of women in society, the rule of law enacted by an elected government, are at odds with the rigid, misogynistic and brutal law of the Qur’an and the hadith.

The war declared on non-Muslims in the 7th century has never ceased, and continues to this day. A hostile ideology, which is prepared to carry out barbaric and random acts of violence to ‘cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved’ and ‘strike them upon the necks’ (Qur’an 8:12) has settled behind enemy lines in the dar al-harb, the house of war.

Look at the image above. It is entitled The Prophet Muhammad and the Muslim Army at the Battle of Uhud, Turkey, Istanbul; c. 1594. Muhammad, on horseback, veiled, looks down at a collection of severed heads and limbs. Today, 1400 years later, YouTube videos from Islamic State show pretty much the same thing, except in gruesome high definition.

The apologists like to claim that Islamic State isn’t really Islam at all, and our Western, fluffy ideal of the Religion of Peace™ is the true Islam. In fact, it’s the reverse. Islamic State embodies the Islam of the Qur’an and Muhammad – what most Muslims in the West practice is a diluted version.

However, it is frightening how easily individuals can switch to the genuine article, and we frequently read of wealthy, well-educated Muslims suddenly ‘going Jihad’. It’s impossible to predict which they may be.

So this is the starting point from which to determine whether our targeting of Muslims is ‘unfair’. No other religious group has ever come close to the animosity and hatred displayed by Islam for ‘non-believers’, and the violent means that they are prepared to use to spread Islam throughout the world.

So when anti-terror legislation, which applies equally to everyone in Australia (because unlike in Muslim countries, non-Muslims are regarded as equals here), is said to be ‘unfairly targeting’ Muslims, then due to Islam’s long history rehearsed above, one should regard the legislation as fairly targeting Muslims, if such Muslims choose to break those laws.

If Baptists, Methodists, Sikhs or Buddhists began plotting to behead random citizens in Martin Place, then they would also be fairly targeted by the legislation as well. But they don’t, so they aren’t.

But instead of quiet introspection and consideration of Islam’s own contribution to this situation, the Islamic community instead lashes out at ‘Islamophobia’ and claims that laws, which are drafted to apply to the whole population, are ‘unfairly targeting’ Muslims. This is absolute nonsense.

Muslims can avoid being ‘unfairly targeted’ by the new laws by simply not breaking them. The other 20-odd million residents of Australia would not dream of funding a terrorist group overseas, or plotting to behead random strangers, or carrying out a mass shooting at an army base, and so the impact of these laws to their lives will be ZERO.

Are breaking and entering laws unfairly targeting burglars? No, they are fairly targeting burglars, because burglary is a criminal offence. Are assault laws unfairly targeting violent thugs? No, they are fairly targeting violent thugs because assault is a criminal offence.

Are the new anti-terrorism laws unfairly targeting Muslims who plot terrorist attacks in Australia? No, they are fairly targeting such persons, because plotting terrorist attacks in Australia is a criminal offence.

To claim that an entire group is targeted by laws which will affect only those that are in breach of their provisions is an unfortunate example of the victim mentality that we see on display too often. Instead of claiming grievances, the Islamic community as a whole should support new laws which target the bad apples amongst them. But there is little sign of that happening.

Related

Comments

At the end of the day a muslim is a muslim, end of story. They abide by the commands in their handbook and their goal is world domination and killing all non-muslims. Ask any muslim what his goal is and he will tell you this. There is no such thing as a “moderate muslim”. They are all just “muslims” with one goal in mind. The so-called moderate, or peace loving muslims are there to placate our fears. When the time comes guess whose side they will be on. They owe no allegiance to any country. They all belong to the islam state. The sooner we wake up to this the better or we will go the way of the UK and Europe.

Spot on, Alamo47….I’ve had a gutful of muslims complaining that they are being “unfairly targetted”…they need to have the guts to stand up for Australia against the muslim terrorists!! If they refuse, then they should pack their bags and join their muslim mates “over there”….quite simple, really!!

“In all these cases” refers to the three instances I quoted above: burglary, assault and alcohol interlocks. Of course other laws may have greater or lesser effects, but we don’t leap to play the victim.

In a nutshell…

“You think they make this shit up? It’s all in the book. Their f***ing book. The only book they ever read. They read it all the time. They never stop. They’re there for one reason and one reason only. To die for the caliphate and usher in a world without infidels. That’s their strategy, and it’s been that way since the 7th century.” Peter Quinn, Homeland

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.